More Bible Jeopardy!
There are so many inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible, how can anyone take it seriously? Here's a nice example. What were Jesus' last words? Three books in the New Testament have three different answers. Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Luke 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
It's as if none of the New Testament authors were actually there (ha ha)...
For many more Bible contradictions, see the Skeptics Annotated Bible!
Comments
How is it that the atheist can claim they can be moral without God? Without God, prove to me that morality even exists. Can you see morality under the microscope?
Also, the whole point of all this reasoning impies that the world is a rational logical place. How can there be logical rational order without a Creator to put that form in place? Atheist must first assume the existance of God before they even begin to argue. Otherwise how could it be anything other than just noise?
I know a lot of godless, but moral people. I treat others the way I want to be treated. Now yes, this is a biblical idea, but it also runs through every modern religion. This tells me that men sought to take a universal idea, and make it particular to their religion.
... and to this moronic statement
"Can you see morality under the microscope?"
I reply... no silly, morality exists only in our consciousness, and by my definition the Christian god has no idea what it means to be moral. This is true even if you discount the old testament.
If you truly want to understand an atheist point of view you should read something. I recommend "End of faith" by Sam Harris. Otherwise you'll just continue to look like an ass with all of your presumptions.
...ARE YOU JOKING? "Without God, prove to me that morality even exists" ????
And you think WITH GOD that there is morality? Check this site and you'll see that almost every day someone will share articles on "annointed" pastors/preists, that have committed IMMORAL acts on children!
Thanks.
Before you respond that morality is whatever is commanded by the Bible, you might want to peruse the Wikipedia page on the topic.
CLICK HERE
Is an action morally good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is morally good?
And...
Is an action morally wrong because God prohibits it, or does God prohibit it because it is already wrong?
I await your answer.
You stated:
"Let's highlight some atheist contradictions."
followed by this inane comment:
"How is it that the atheist can claim they can be moral without God? Without God, prove to me that morality even exists."
The above statement is baseless and stupid in so many ways I hardly know where to begin.
God doesn't exist, I don’t fear hell. I consider myself "moral", by my standards. My general moral standard is I try not let my actions or words negatively affect another persons well being. I actually don’t like the word “moral” or “sin” because to me the presume the validity of religion.
How do you define "moral"? Do you use the christain bible god as a moral standard? He's a murdering bastard full of hate and bigotry, much like a lot fundamentalist christains. Maybe that is your standard? I would not consider you a "moral" person.
Which god to you use for a moral standard? There are buckets full of gods to pick and chose from out there, several of which made into your bible. That still leaves several thousands from which to pick your morality.
How about societies that self-destructed due negative social behavior? Those societies would not survive to reproduce. Societies that tended to have less negative behavior did tend to survive and reproduce. The societies that were generally the most prosperous and healthy survived. Evolution of societies?
"Can you see morality under the microscope?"
The above is an utterly stupid statement.
“Also, the whole point of all this reasoning impies that the world is a rational logical place. How can there be logical rational order without a Creator to put that form in place? Atheist must first assume the existance of God before they even begin to argue. Otherwise how could it be anything other than just noise?”
Nothing but baseless assertions, straw man tatics and presumptions, your ignorance is showing. (yep, ad-hominem attack, but rather accurate)
I am good to others because I will be rewarded (Heaven) or I will be punished (Hell).
Morality based on humanistic values:
I am good to others because it causes others to be good to me.
Which is more moral?
Anyway, Anonymous: The point of the comic is not morality, but the inconsistency of the Bible. Pointing out Atheist contradictions is irrelevant. Christians claim that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Atheists make no such claim.
No. It means that reason and logic, which evolved as functions of the brain, can be used to understand the natural world and its processes. No god needed. Just good old natural selection. Even a dog can be demonstrated to use reason and logic. That is what "hunting strategy" is based on.
Morality is a set of behaviors expressed by social animals that best serves the survival of the group, and individuals within the group. Again, it arises by natural selection. Destructive behaviors will ultimately lead to the collapse of the social group. Constructive behaviors lead to its success. No god. Just natural selection.
Try reading outside your pathetic god's romper-room library.
Both are murderers, rapist, baby killers, practice ethnic cleansing, lie, unjust, encourage slavery, jealous, fool of hatred, and the best of all; very stupid.
We came easily say when we look at their morality standard, that the Christian god and Hitler comes from the same mold.
Keven
I've said it before, I'll say it again. There is something seriously wrong with the bible...
Cast the beam out of thine own eye, christian.
Do you know that the bible says that a person who claims to know Jesus and does not keep his commandments is "a liar, and the truth is not in him?" Do you keep the commandments of Jesus, anonymous? To the letter? Don't lie, now. That would be immoral.
Do all christians keep his commandments, to the letter? If they do not, then the truth is not in them, and would it not be true from a christian standpoint, that Christ is not in them, since the truth is not in them?
Do you believe everything the bible says, anonymous?
Again, the problem is the christian god, who is insane, frankly.
Again, there is something wrong with the bible...
Anonytard wrote
Truthfully, two can play at this. Let's highlight some atheist contradictions. . .
Which one of the 2850 and still counting god(s) are you talking about?
Got any evidence for this god of yours?
I'm waiting.
I've recently admitted to being an atheist after many years of having my Mormon version of Christianity being slowly chipped away. It's much easier to believe. It's a good out. But, being an atheist makes the responsibility of my life all mine. It's a lot tougher but once the reality sets in, what the hell else can one do? I can still have hope and dreams only now I know it's all up to me. But, on the plus side I'm no longer afraid of death.
I doubt you've ever returned to read this page, but in case you have, I won't rehash the good points others have made.
I will simply point out that atheism is not a religion or all-encompassing philosophy; it simply means that an atheist does not believe in any gods AND/OR believes there ARE no gods. While some atheists have similar beliefs, there is no "atheist" position on morality, ethics, etc.
And we don't have to assume there is a creator before we discuss the topic. I don't consider discussing things with my fellow human beings just "making noise"- it's an activity that can have very real outcomes and effects.
"...I treat others the way I want to be treated. Now yes, this is a biblical idea, but it also runs through every modern religion..."
I'm convinced that not only does this theme run through every religion, and other systems of ethics, but that sooner or later someone's going to write some high-level computer code, in which the programs can modify themselves based on results of experience, where the principle known as the golden rule will evolve in silicon-hosted simulation.
To suggest that we needed religion, let alone any one particular religion, as the anonymouse suggested, to develope this no-brainer of a principle of mutual philanthropy (or at least mutual non-misanthropy) is blinkered, inside-the-box, thinking of the narrowest kind.
Evolutionary biologists have shown that there is great benefit in individuals acting for the greater good of the society as a whole. You'll always get individuals who try to take advantage, but they tend not to be so successful in the long run - people and animals like to be able to trust others. What is that if that's not morality?
Also, there was a study about "Biblical morality" and how religion skews perceptions of morality. Around 1,500 Jewish schoolchildren were given the story of Joshua and Jericho. Almost all of them thought that the destruction of Jericho was moral - on the basis that God had commanded it and God couldn't do anything immoral. Showing another 150 Jewish schoolchildren the same story but with the names changed, most of them now viewed the story as immoral - in what way was it right for someone to destroy a city and murder all of its inhabitants just because they believed their god had told them to do so?
There are grunting, loincloth-wearing tribesmen shitting in the woods somewhere who have "gods" that "command" them to kill the other tribes around them. We call them savages. Take the religion of some desert-dwelling nomads, add some Catholic hocus-pocus, sprinkle in some pseudo-intellectual "theology", and, wham-o! you've got TODAY'S grunting tribesmen, all set to destroy tribes in the name of their "god". Sheesh.
Kudos, Laughing Buddha, that very well describes what happened in the desert all those years ago. Constantine
who was directly responsible for all the christian religions of today knew what he had to do to control the "grunting tribesmen".
Your excellently described
formula for todays religions is a KEEPER.
You look at a god and you know there is a god-maker. You look at the god-maker, and you know there is a god-maker-god-maker.
If you god created and is in control of everything, then she is repsonsible for the floods, the hurricanes, the high winds, the earth quakes, the super novas, the diseases, the inhospitaple sun that gives skin cancer, the inhospitable climate that would kill us all were it not for clothing and shelter...
Do you think God's mind is in the path taken by a tornadoe? Or is it random forces of nature?
Becareful how you answer. You can't have things both ways.
Wow.. such a brilliant straw-man of the natural reaction to having been brainwashed into a cult called christianity. And why should we "feel" that there is a god if there isn't credible evidence for one?
"Anger at a type of God or a book written by men about someone they thought was God."
The anger isn't directed at a book, but the actions of people stemming from a morally repugnant belief system.
"... to deny a creator is to deny the stars exist."
It's like saying that magnetic attraction only works because invisible pixies are pushing things together. Then claiming that if you deny the existence of pixies, you deny magnetism.
Unless you can provide some credible evidence for invisible pix...er...your god, then why expect anyone to believe it?
Post a Comment